Fact check: How many people cancelled disney since kimmel

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, no specific number of Disney subscription cancellations following Jimmy Kimmel's suspension has been reported by any source. However, multiple indicators suggest there was significant consumer backlash against Disney's decision to suspend Kimmel's show.

The most concrete evidence of the scale comes from technical indicators: Disney+ cancellation pages reportedly crashed from heavy traffic after Kimmel's suspension ^[1], suggesting an overwhelming volume of cancellation attempts. Additionally, Google searches on how to cancel Disney+ and Hulu subscriptions spiked following the suspension announcement ^{[2] [3]}.

The boycott movement extended beyond streaming services. Sources report that some people canceled their upcoming Disney vacations in protest ^[3], indicating the backlash affected Disney's broader business ecosystem. The movement targeted multiple Disney-owned platforms, with reports of cancellations affecting Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN subscriptions ^[4].

Social media became a primary platform for the protest, with various subscribers taking to social media to express their anger and announce their subscription cancellations ^[5]. Sources specifically mention that viewers have been posting online to announce they are cancelling their subscriptions to Disney's online streaming platform, Disney+, and ABC's platform Hulu ^[6].

The financial impact appears to have been significant enough to influence Disney's decision-making, as Disney stock took a devastating nosedive during this period ^[1], and the company ultimately reinstated Jimmy Kimmel after the suspension ^[7].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks crucial context about what specifically Jimmy Kimmel did that led to his suspension and the subsequent boycott. The analyses reference Kimmel's suspension over Charlie Kirk remarks ^[8], but the specific nature of these remarks and why they were controversial enough to warrant suspension is not detailed.

Celebrity involvement amplified the boycott movement, with Mark Ruffalo warning that Disney's stock price would drop "a lot further" if ABC cancels Jimmy Kimmel Live ^[4]. This suggests the movement had support from influential figures in the entertainment industry, which likely contributed to its effectiveness.

The analyses present this primarily as a consumer-driven protest movement, with sources describing it as demonstrating "why protests work" ^[3]. However, there's missing context about Disney's perspective on the suspension decision and whether there were legitimate business or content policy reasons behind it.

The timeline of events is also unclear - while sources mention that Jimmy Kimmel returned to air ^[9], the duration of the suspension and the exact sequence of events leading to his reinstatement lacks detail.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains an implicit assumption that may be misleading. By asking "how many people cancelled Disney since Kimmel," it presupposes that there were measurable, quantifiable cancellations directly attributable to the Kimmel situation. However, none of the sources provide specific numbers of cancellations, suggesting this data either doesn't exist publicly or wasn't tracked/released by Disney.

The phrasing also oversimplifies what appears to have been a complex corporate decision and public response. The question reduces the situation to a simple cause-and-effect relationship without acknowledging the broader context of Disney's content policies, celebrity influence, or the multifaceted nature of consumer boycotts.

There's potential bias in how the movement is characterized across sources. Some frame it as a "powerful" movement that "shows why protests work" ^[3], while others focus more neutrally on the "backlash" and "subscription cancellations" ^{[8] [9]}. This suggests different media outlets may be presenting the story through different ideological lenses.

The question also fails to acknowledge that Disney ultimately reversed its decision ^[8], which suggests either the boycott was effective or there were other factors that led to Kimmel's reinstatement. Without this context, the question implies an ongoing situation rather than a resolved controversy.